No longer could one say that the Christian denominations would not accept civil unions and same-sex marriage as equivalent to heterosexual marriage. Besides the media and academia, now liberal Protestantism joined the charge for change.

More importantly for the purposes of VirtueOnline concerns let us look at the consequences for the Church. First there was the politicization of the whole issue. For example: prevention of a general referendum in the congregations, although in the United Church every jot and tittle of change in the Manual was referred for approval to all congregations.

Legal authorities in the denomination always sided with the hierarchy to prevent any semblance of justice. A process of harassment was begun against all leaders in the Community of Concern movement who raised their heads at all. I was Chair of Presbytery when a directive was sent out to church leaders to take all means necessary to stop those who critiqued the denomination's position.

One of my colleagues was visited by the Ministry and Personnel Ctee. and told that he had to resign and refrain from any comments on homosexuality or he would be fired immediately. Unfortunately he did resign and needed legal representation to get some fairness. Clergy who mentioned that not giving to the national Mission and Service fund was probably the last means to protest, were immediately threatened with firing unless they retracted.

At the General Council itself table groups were used to pressure any dissenters into consensus. The only evangelical on the table which gave the recommendation on homosexual orientation finally gave in, after countless meetings, to the idea that 'nothing was really changed' by this motion. His permission to make this unanimous led him to be given great publicity as an evangelical in favour but resulted in his own marital break-up and vilification.

I was the person in the Community of Concern (the opposition network) in charge of maintaining communication across the country and compiled some sad news. Over 70 pastors left the United Church in 1988-90 (many others had given up earlier or left later) with significant parts of at least 70 congregations and often whole churches. From my experience, most of the leavers were in their 30s and 40s not wanting to put the rest of their lives and their children through blatant heresy. Older pastors and especially congregation members were most reluctant to leave the building that they had invested so much in. Those remaining were however demoralized and confused. Never did the United Church admit to the bleeding. Each year they announced those few pastors joining the United Church while no public account was given of those leaving.

Finances would have become much more critical but a naïve UCC member in the 1950s named the church in his will and left millions to the completely changed denomination. The UCC has survived and churches are still seen across the country. Those who could not stand it have mostly left while those dissenters who remain to look for change can easily be ignored. The church regularly intervenes for gay marriage and any left-wing cause while playing down the Trinity, Scripture and evangelism. Most congregations have announced that they will not tolerate any further discussion of homosexuality as it is too painful and divisive. The dissenters are thus obliged to shut up. A few congregations remain orthodox but without any support and in opposition to all major trends and education from the national church.

Several vital differences can be seen between the United Church and the Anglican/Episcopal situations. We (yes I was a United Church pastor for 7 ½ years) had no media outlet to spread our news and connect up. Since the denomination controlled all the newspapers, departments and staff, it could shut off all communication. Bravo for VirtueOnline and other links.

Secondly we had no hierarchy that spoke out in opposition. It is true that some former moderators protested at the initial outrageous proposals. However when the language was modified there was not another peep. Every single staff person or leader sat on their hands or supported the new position. We young radicals could easily be dismissed as fanatical fundamentalists. You have articulate bishops and even dioceses speaking out, theologians like J.I. Packer and a great heritage to build on. God has blessed you richly.

Thirdly, we had no involvement by brothers and sisters in Christ in the rest of the world who heard nothing of the changes. When the issue was compared with the oppression of blacks and women, how could we white males respond with credibility? We were constantly associated with right-wing Americans. What a difference it makes to have the statements of articulate, devoted and pious leaders from Africa, South America, Asia and the Middle East who object and exhort us to faithfulness.

Something that is not different is the tactics of 'liberal' leaders of harassing conservative leaders, trying to control the media, threatening lawsuits, claiming that the majority is happy and that there will be no sequels (everything will blow over), conducting lawsuits over property, using finances to prevent small or poor congregations or dioceses from objecting.

In conclusion let me mention one learning from my battles that helped lead me to the Mennonite Church. Lawsuits are positive in insisting on justice which is clearly (before God) on the side of dissenters. However true justice will not be achieved short of heaven. Lawsuits do foster and augment deep bitterness (one friend of mine died basically of a bitter heart), give the Church a bad name in public, seem to go against Scripture (although it is argued that the others aren't truly Christians) and consume Kingdom money. Mennonites with great wisdom thus refuse. If you don't take that route, count these costs in before beginning the process and as in Just War theory, do not pursue a process likely to lose.

A second related learning: watch your ethics more than the ethics of the opposite side. Yes they are unjust, unprincipled and dirty. BUT are we honouring Christ in our actions? I had to pull back from certain good political actions on that basis. Set out rules for fair fighting ahead of time (see David Augsburger's list in When Caring Is Not Enough: Resolving Conflicts Through Fair Fighting) and ask regularly for self-critique.

A third related learning: life begins after being freed from a tradition-bound, heretical, unethical institution to serve the Lord. But those seeking maximum independence rather than Christ's service and a new body to be accountable to, will not prosper. I am excited by the new possibilities in the US and in Canada for a new structure building on the profound Anglican traditions and intellectual stimulation. My theological formation owes most to Anglican teachers like J.I. Packer, Alec Motyer, Michael Green, John Stott, Alister McGrath and my wonderful years at Trinity College, Bristol, England. Although I ended up on another path, many of us look to Anglicans for the biblical depth that is rare in evangelical circles. May God continue to bless you richly and guide you carefully. I will follow your battles and continue to pray for you.

---Richard Lougheed is the son and grandson of United Church of Canada clergy. After training at an Anglican evangelical college in England he was pastor of a UCC church in northern Quebec which also served Anglicans with Prayer Book worship. He is married to an Anglican doctor and has taught Church history for 13 years in a French evangelical seminary in Montreal.